Yes, the car led police to him. But that isn't convincing because the police misidentified the year and if early media reports are to be believed (many threads ago), they thought it might have been a Nissan, IIRC at first. We've all seen the videos. It's very blurry and unclear, and more importantly, did they ever place that car at the actual crime scene? I don't remember them doing that.
But that's the point. If the DNA is thrown out, everything else is weak. Guilty or not, the white car, his "weirdness," phone being off, and wifi in the neighborhood, by itself will not convict this guy. I would bet all of those things could apply to scores of others in the area. It's the DNA that's most important. If that is thrown out for whatever reason, the cases collapses, IMO.
There is no doubt that he drives a white Elantra. It casts doubt on whether the white Elantra in the video is his white Elantra. If the DNA is thrown out, this becomes so much weaker.
This doesn't make sense to me. He had no business in that area at night? Wasn't it at 10 pm that his phone used the wifi in the neighborhood? Weren't there grocery stores in that area? Wasn't there a shopping hub of some sort there? But even if it was later and everything was closed, we have no evidence (that we know of) that puts him in the neighborhood for any length of time prior to the murders. He could have been driving through on the way to some place else. Heck, he could have just been driving around, which he has every right to do. To say he had no business being there is an overstatement that is factually biased as we all have a right to be in whatever public area we want, regardless of time of day.
His phone was out for hours, not "during the precise time in question." Those hours happened to have included the time of the murder, but it was also out hours before, wasn't it? We also don't know if his phone was out the night before or the night before that or the night before that. All we know is that his phone was off the night of the murders for several hours. All that proves is that his phone can't exonerate him. It doesn't prove he did it.
MOO.